Sorry if that sounded hash.

I noticed a problem with Willow, just west of MLK, and now see that has been changed to "trunk_link". I'm not sure where you got that designation, but that does not seem right. Tertiary was definitely a better fit. Did you change 42 ways in one change set... likely incorrectly? It would be a good idea to make your changes in smaller batches and ask someone before making major changes.

Lansing now has a OSM Wiki and Forum, the links are below, if you would like to join.

Highways osm.wiki/Highways
Highway Samples osm.wiki/Highway_tagging_samples
Highway_link osm.wiki/Highway_link

Lansing OSM Wiki
osm.wiki/Lansing,_Michigan

Lansing Forum
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/mcaosm

Love the work on cycling features. Thanks!

During a concert, at Adado Park, I considered making the same change. Using this section of trail (way/518695910) I experimented with the tags I thought appropriate. But never got around to completing thought.

I completely understand.

It is great to have another Lansing mapper.

I'm not sure that the nodes you added, with only a Name tag will ever be rendered. You may want to at least add shop=yes ( shop=* "Shop yes" in OSMand) or office=* ( office=* "Administrative office" in OSMand ) tags to them.

Nice work! Thanks.

I know that area well and that line does not make sense. I'll remove it for now.

hfly hh, if you would like help with this, let me know.

Removal changeset: changeset/49954816

There was already a Cheddar's POI here and a building here. Rather than combine and clean these up, you have added another POI. There are also other problems, for instance, the street name is wrong and the City, Zip and loc_name tags are redundant. I would correct these, however, I am sure that you are pushing changes to OSM without taking into consideration its current state. Thus, any changes I might make, would be overwritten the next change that you push.

Changeset description should read:
Added detail to Arch Fitness.

I stand corrected by the following article...

osm.wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

I could be wrong and in this case, it might be fine. However, it has been my experience that it is preferred to have a generic building, with a detailed POI Node. ... It is simple matter to upgrade a POI, by surrounding it with a generic building. It works well for buildings containing multiple POI nodes. Some editors, like OSMand, will only allow editing POI nodes. Google seems to be doing well with the generic building and detailed POI technique. Etc.

I know better. It is "right OF way", not "right-a-way". Not enough coffee.

Thanks for joining the fun and mapping Evergreen Cycles. Just so you know, only the house number, street and occasionally an addr:unit need to be tagged.

"Tags such as Key:addr:country, Key:addr:city, Key:addr:postcode are often redundant as features inside administrative boundaries (when mapped) "inherit" their attributes..." -- osm.wiki/Addresses

That would probably be, because the two ways were not connected. I've just corrected this. changeset/44713128

Not sure the best way to tag this. So far, three different tagging schemes have not made the name show up, only the house number.

Wish I had more time.

What would REALLY be nice, is if CATA would take the task on. I wonder if OSM has an easy way for public transportation administrators to maintain their routes.

Mind me asking where you got the data for the bus stops and routes? Did you have to gather it manually? I keep thinking there must be a way to pull stop information from CATA's HiWire web application (http://tp.cata.org/hiwire). CATA must have given this same data to Google, for their maps. With stop times even.

I like the way the competitors are doing it. Generic building with a POI point.

Should this be a point at the front door, on a generic building?

Why would this minor change appear, in the history, to affect a large portion of the world?